Jan 142013
 
Liberal politics endorse "gun free zones." This insane practice leaves American citizens, "sitting ducks" for crazed and misguided killers who don't bother to observe the law.

Liberal politics endorse “gun free zones.” This insane practice leaves American citizens, “sitting ducks” for crazed and misguided killers who don’t bother to observe the law.

Moralmatters.org postings: December 16-22/12

Gun control the media hides and ignores – moralmatters.org/2012/12/17/

Guns save lives: Firearms prevent crimes – moralmatters.org/2012/12/18/

The gun free zone political pipe dream – moralmatters.org/2012/12/19/

Hypocritical anti-gun politicians guilty: Part and parcel of gun violence crime – moralmatters.org/2012/12/20/

Last week’s moralmatters.org top blog article and other postings: December 9-15/12

NRA proposes solution to needless student deaths while politicians do nothing and others fret and fume – moralmatters.org/2012/12/22/

_____________________________

Please note 3 important informational links:

Election Projection – The Battle for Capitol Hill – 2012 Senate – electionprojection.com/2012elections/

The Complete List of Email Addresses and Fax Numbers for the U.S. Congress and Governors – conservativeusa.org/

U.S. Constitution Online – usconstitution.net/

Posted by:

Pastor emeritus Nathan M. Bickel

http://www.thechristianmessage.org/

http://moralmatters.org/

  6 Responses to “Moralmatters.org articles December 16-22/12: Firearms, gun control, Second Amendment rights and NRA”

  1. http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/ Please take a few moments to enter your name a
    http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/

    Please take a few moments to enter your name and address. That’s all you have to do, the link finds your reps for you and send the letter. Protect this right, if they take this who knows what’s next!!

  2. Hi Sir, It’s me, Chris Farrell. I have a theory. Could the Chief Justice be about to shock the Hell out of the world and rule against Obama as being constitutionally eligible to be president on February 15th? Could Chief Justice Roberts have been defensively posturing for the blow-back, “black-lash” if you please, of a decision he may have realized would be necessary to make on Mr. Obama’s purported constitutional eligibility when he ruled so surprisingly on Obamacare? Might not the Chief Justice have been intentionally positioning himself and the Supreme Court as apparently not unfavorable to Mr. Obama so as to insulate them both from certain to arise liberal charges of racism should a decision need to be rendered by the court on the issue of constitutional eligibility that Mr. Obama is not now and never has been eligible to be president?

    If, after considering the evidence submitted to the Supreme Court in multiple cases which the court has turned down, the Chief Justice found it necessary to consider various paths that the Supreme Court eventually might have to take in defense of the Constitution, could the Chief Justice have strategically planned to first rule in favor of Obamacarea’s a tax, knowing that such a ruling would theatrically demonstrate an apparent support for Obama, or, at the very least, demonstrate no antagonism towards the man,while still leaving Obamacare open to state by state dismantling until such time as a ruling on Mr. Obama’s eligibility would remove the law retro-actively as having been passed while Mr. Obama was in the commission of crimes, and most importantly, act as the perfect disclaimer to angry liberal entities who will surely cry out racism when they rallied Obama supporters to anything but “civil” disobedience should the Supreme Court retro-actively abrogate the illegal election of the constitutionally ineligible fraud and forger, Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack “King Hussein” Obama Jr., the “Manchurian” Muslim from Mombasa, a.k.a. Soebarkha, a.k.a. Harrison J. Bounel?

    Could the Chief Justice be about to shock the Hell out of the world and rule against Obama as being constitutionally eligible to be president on February 15th? Will the Chief Justice permit the two Supreme Court Justices appointed by Mr. Obama, or whatever his legal name, (the name written on his original long form birth certificate, not to be confused with the electronic file released by the White House in 2011 which has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to be a poorly constructed forgery), to participate in the hearing of evidence surrounding the issue of eligibility when their conflict of interest could not be greater insofar as their very appointments to the Supreme Court would necessarily have to also be retro-actively abrogated as they were accomplished while Mr. Obama was in the commission of the criminal usurpation of the office of the president of the United States concomitant with the military rank and authority of commander-in-chief.

    Mr. Obama’s criminal usurpation of the presidency is the most horrendous crime committed against the American people and our experiment in “government of the People, by the People, and for the People,” in our country’s history. All those complicit in Mr. Obama’s crimes must be brought to justice if liberty is to be preserved. At this point in time, the question of whether or not Mr. Obama’s criminal usurpation of the presidency shall be addressed by the proper authorities is completely in the hands of God and Chief Justice Roberts. In God we trust.

    Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 23:12:36 +0000 To: unbontir@hotmail.com

  3. […] Moralmatters.org articles December 16-22/12: Firearms, gun control, Second Amendment rights and NRA […]

 Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>